The other reason it looking at the approach the strategy the reasoning is so much better than a binary sense of whether something is right or wrong answer is that there's ambiguity in what really constitutes a right answer to begin with. At least in most situations. For example in hard Sciences we may learn that we drop second order details and ignore them for purpose of answering the question but still one could make the argument that in so doing the answers we land on are inherently imperfect. Does this make them less right? Could all be debated. But instead seeing someone who explains I'm going to drop the second order detail cuz I think it's not significant to how I would use this result this is the kind of thing that really is valuable